Paul Ryan, American Values and Corporatocracy

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
5,858
Reaction score
681
Points
98
Location
In some grass near you
Jeffrey Sachs: Paul Ryan, American Values and Corporatocracy


Ryan claims I would replace "the ideals of individual liberty" with the beneficence of "an intrusive, unlimited government." This is how Ryan sees my call for government to regulate banks, protect the environment from pollution, promote science, tax millionaires and billionaires, and limit the lobbying power of corporations. When one is on the far right of the political spectrum like most of the Republican Party today, even moderate policies look like "unlimited government."

Ryan calls the mixed economy anti-American. History, however, shows otherwise. From the start of the republic, our Founding Fathers and our greatest presidents have championed an affirmative role of government in the economy. Ironically, Ryan turns to Thomas Jefferson for proof, imaging that Jefferson would support Ryan's libertarian views.

Ryan seems to be unaware that Jefferson vigorously opposed the untrammeled actions of commercial banks and corporations that Ryan champions. Jefferson famously wrote, "I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies."
He declared the need to "crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

Anything not far right is big government and repugs don't know history.
 

Mr. Shaman

Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
23,892
Reaction score
820
Points
48
Jeffrey Sachs: Paul Ryan, American Values and Corporatocracy


Ryan claims I would replace "the ideals of individual liberty" with the beneficence of "an intrusive, unlimited government." This is how Ryan sees my call for government to regulate banks, protect the environment from pollution, promote science, tax millionaires and billionaires, and limit the lobbying power of corporations. When one is on the far right of the political spectrum like most of the Republican Party today, even moderate policies look like "unlimited government."

Ryan calls the mixed economy anti-American. History, however, shows otherwise. From the start of the republic, our Founding Fathers and our greatest presidents have championed an affirmative role of government in the economy. Ironically, Ryan turns to Thomas Jefferson for proof, imaging that Jefferson would support Ryan's libertarian views.

Ryan seems to be unaware that Jefferson vigorously opposed the untrammeled actions of commercial banks and corporations that Ryan champions. Jefferson famously wrote, "I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies."
He declared the need to "crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

Anything not far right is big government and repugs don't know history.

Ryan's preference for Fascism/A Master-Race has made him no-longer significant.​

"In fact, the two streams—the furious Tea Party rebels and Ryan the earnest budget geek—both spring from the same source. And it is to that source that you must look if you want to understand what Ryan is really after, and what makes these activists so angry.

The Tea Party began early in 2009 after an improvised rant by Rick Santelli, a CNBC commentator who called for an uprising to protest the Obama administration’s subsidizing the “losers’ mortgages.” Video of his diatribe rocketed around the country, and protesters quickly adopted both his call for a tea party and his general abhorrence of government that took from the virtuous and the successful and gave to the poor, the uninsured, the bankrupt—in short, the losers. It sounded harsh, Santelli quickly conceded, but “at the end of the day I’m an Ayn Rander

Ayn Rand, of course, was a kind of politicized L. Ron Hubbard—a novelist-philosopher who inspired a cult of acolytes who deem her the greatest human being who ever lived.

The enduring heart of Rand’s totalistic philosophy was Marxism flipped upside down. Rand viewed the capitalists, not the workers, as the producers of all wealth, and the workers, not the capitalists, as useless parasites."

 

Mr. Shaman

Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
23,892
Reaction score
820
Points
48
Jeffrey Sachs: Paul Ryan, American Values and Corporatocracy

Anything not far right is big government and repugs don't know history.
I guess that's why Paul Ryan assumes HE created the concept of his.....



"Rand viewed the capitalists, not the workers, as the producers of all wealth, and the workers, not the capitalists, as useless parasites."


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsn1x9ekEeE]BBC CONSPIRACY - 2001 (Full Version) - YouTube[/ame]​
 

Greenbeard

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
6,871
Reaction score
1,217
Points
200
Location
New England
Paul Ryan is the public face of a sham agenda. Cut taxes for the top of the economic ladder, slash aid to the poor and to children, dismantle Medicare and auction the pieces off to corporate America.

For all his bluster about "unelected bureaucrats" and his lipservice to individual Americans, Ryan very much favors transferring power from the People's House to a relatively small group of elites and a handful of faceless corporate entities. A Gilded Age on steroids.

No thanks, Paul.
 

Sactowndog

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
772
Reaction score
61
Points
63
Paul Ryan is the public face of a sham agenda. Cut taxes for the top of the economic ladder, slash aid to the poor and to children, dismantle Medicare and auction the pie
polices off to corporate America.

For all his bluster about "unelected bureaucrats" and his lipservice to individual Americans, Ryan very much favors transferring power from the People's House to a relatively small group of elites and a handful of faceless corporate entities. A Gilded Age on steroids.

No thanks, Paul.

Let's face it both parties are at fault in different ways. The government/large corporation partnership extends far beyond just "auctioning off America" to corporate America. Corporate America plays a role in extending the current police state mentatlity. From insuring the government can track you to regulatory requirements that have corporations checking and inforcing policies WW.

It is definately a two way street and both parties are complicit.
 

Oldstyle

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Messages
31,206
Reaction score
4,926
Points
1,160
Location
Florida
Paul Ryan is the public face of a sham agenda. Cut taxes for the top of the economic ladder, slash aid to the poor and to children, dismantle Medicare and auction the pieces off to corporate America.

For all his bluster about "unelected bureaucrats" and his lipservice to individual Americans, Ryan very much favors transferring power from the People's House to a relatively small group of elites and a handful of faceless corporate entities. A Gilded Age on steroids.

No thanks, Paul.
Paul Ryan favors fiscal sanity...which is why he's been attacked relentlessly by progressives for the past year and a half. The truth, Greenbeard...is that Paul Ryan frightens the liberal left to death because he's NOT an ideologue...he's a fiscal "wonk" that crunches numbers instead of engaging in partisan politics.
 

Greenbeard

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
6,871
Reaction score
1,217
Points
200
Location
New England
Paul Ryan favors fiscal sanity...which is why he's been attacked relentlessly by progressives for the past year and a half. The truth, Greenbeard...is that Paul Ryan frightens the liberal left to death because he's NOT an ideologue...he's a fiscal "wonk" that crunches numbers instead of engaging in partisan politics.
He's attacked mercilessly because he's a partisan hack whose latest "plan" is nothing but ideological drivel. I understand that shifting costs to state governments, the elderly, the poor, safety net providers, etc is what passes for budget genius/wonkery in rightwing circles. But if he was actually a fiscal wonk, he'd have some interest in attacking the cost drivers in the health care system and he'd understand the dangers of forcing seniors into higher-cost insurance (he sure has faith that his assumption that seniors will be on the hook for it will hold good).

It's not difficult to spot someone paying partisan politics. Just watch his actions, particularly when it comes to proposals that did or could have bipartisan support.

Two years ago he supported state-based health insurance exchanges, refundable and advanceable tax credits to help people buy insurance in the individual market, and the creation of federal bodies that "support research, demonstration projects, evaluations, training, guideline development, and the dissemination of information" on all manner of health issues. The tort reform language in the ACA was lifted directly from Ryan's own reform bill. Yet when the other party adopted many of his ideas he became a staunch opponent of them.

When his party came back into power in the House, he abandoned more moderate versions of his Medicare proposal on which he had collaborated with Democrats to tack hard right this year and eliminate any semblance of bipartisanship.

I especially like how he scrubbed use of the word "vouchers" form his website (he specifically the word "vouchers" to describe his repeal-and-replace of Medicare right up until the middle of last year) and attempted to use Democrats' use of descriptor to club them over the head.

Ryan seems to be more interested in cementing his status in rightwing circles than in getting anything done. And to the extent that he actually does want to advance his agenda--which, again, consists primarily of cutting taxes for the top of the economic ladder, slashing aid to the poor and to children, and dismantling Medicare and auction the pieces off to corporate America--that's cause for serious concern.
 

GoneBezerk

Rookie
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
7,603
Reaction score
493
Points
0
Yeah, Paul Ryan is soooooooooo evil making sure the Federal Govt gets back to its roots and gets out of the business of messing with everyone's life with tax and regulation policies, while lining the pockets of lberals in/out of the Federal Govt.

What a terrible person to want our tax dollars spent wisely and less scams like Solyndra.

Those whining are the scum that want a handout....
 

alan1

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
4,357
Points
245
Location
Shoveling the ashes
Paul Ryan favors fiscal sanity...which is why he's been attacked relentlessly by progressives for the past year and a half. The truth, Greenbeard...is that Paul Ryan frightens the liberal left to death because he's NOT an ideologue...he's a fiscal "wonk" that crunches numbers instead of engaging in partisan politics.
He's attacked mercilessly because he's a partisan hack whose latest "plan" is nothing but ideological drivel. I understand that shifting costs to state governments, the elderly, the poor, safety net providers, etc is what passes for budget genius/wonkery in rightwing circles. But if he was actually a fiscal wonk, he'd have some interest in attacking the cost drivers in the health care system and he'd understand the dangers of forcing seniors into higher-cost insurance (he sure has faith that his assumption that seniors will be on the hook for it will hold good).

It's not difficult to spot someone paying partisan politics. Just watch his actions, particularly when it comes to proposals that did or could have bipartisan support.

Two years ago he supported state-based health insurance exchanges, refundable and advanceable tax credits to help people buy insurance in the individual market, and the creation of federal bodies that "support research, demonstration projects, evaluations, training, guideline development, and the dissemination of information" on all manner of health issues. The tort reform language in the ACA was lifted directly from Ryan's own reform bill. Yet when the other party adopted many of his ideas he became a staunch opponent of them.

When his party came back into power in the House, he abandoned more moderate versions of his Medicare proposal on which he had collaborated with Democrats to tack hard right this year and eliminate any semblance of bipartisanship.

I especially like how he scrubbed use of the word "vouchers" form his website (he specifically the word "vouchers" to describe his repeal-and-replace of Medicare right up until the middle of last year) and attempted to use Democrats' use of descriptor to club them over the head.

Ryan seems to be more interested in cementing his status in rightwing circles than in getting anything done. And to the extent that he actually does want to advance his agenda--which, again, consists primarily of cutting taxes for the top of the economic ladder, slashing aid to the poor and to children, and dismantling Medicare and auction the pieces off to corporate America--that's cause for serious concern.
Since when is it my responsibility to provide for the well being of somebody simply because they are a child or are poor.
It is my responsibility to provide for my own children, but not for your children (or Bob's or Mary's children).
It is never my responsibility to provide for somebody simply because they happen to be poor. That should be my choice.
 

Oldstyle

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Messages
31,206
Reaction score
4,926
Points
1,160
Location
Florida
Paul Ryan favors fiscal sanity...which is why he's been attacked relentlessly by progressives for the past year and a half. The truth, Greenbeard...is that Paul Ryan frightens the liberal left to death because he's NOT an ideologue...he's a fiscal "wonk" that crunches numbers instead of engaging in partisan politics.
He's attacked mercilessly because he's a partisan hack whose latest "plan" is nothing but ideological drivel. I understand that shifting costs to state governments, the elderly, the poor, safety net providers, etc is what passes for budget genius/wonkery in rightwing circles. But if he was actually a fiscal wonk, he'd have some interest in attacking the cost drivers in the health care system and he'd understand the dangers of forcing seniors into higher-cost insurance (he sure has faith that his assumption that seniors will be on the hook for it will hold good).

It's not difficult to spot someone paying partisan politics. Just watch his actions, particularly when it comes to proposals that did or could have bipartisan support.

Two years ago he supported state-based health insurance exchanges, refundable and advanceable tax credits to help people buy insurance in the individual market, and the creation of federal bodies that "support research, demonstration projects, evaluations, training, guideline development, and the dissemination of information" on all manner of health issues. The tort reform language in the ACA was lifted directly from Ryan's own reform bill. Yet when the other party adopted many of his ideas he became a staunch opponent of them.

When his party came back into power in the House, he abandoned more moderate versions of his Medicare proposal on which he had collaborated with Democrats to tack hard right this year and eliminate any semblance of bipartisanship.

I especially like how he scrubbed use of the word "vouchers" form his website (he specifically the word "vouchers" to describe his repeal-and-replace of Medicare right up until the middle of last year) and attempted to use Democrats' use of descriptor to club them over the head.

Ryan seems to be more interested in cementing his status in rightwing circles than in getting anything done. And to the extent that he actually does want to advance his agenda--which, again, consists primarily of cutting taxes for the top of the economic ladder, slashing aid to the poor and to children, and dismantling Medicare and auction the pieces off to corporate America--that's cause for serious concern.
What I find most amusing about left wing rants about Paul Ryan is how they attack him for proposing solutions to problems that anyone with the slightest common sense KNOWS we have to do something about to keep from becoming insolvent as a nation. You demagogue Ryan...yet offer no alternative plans. He was the ONLY politician in Washington who had the stones to sit down and write out a comprehensive plan to address our looming fiscal crisis. Now you may not like some of his solutions but in the glaring absence of an alternative being presented by progressives...attacking Ryan for what he's proposed seems to me to be the height of hypocrisy.
 

Greenbeard

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
6,871
Reaction score
1,217
Points
200
Location
New England
You demagogue Ryan...yet offer no alternative plans. He was the ONLY politician in Washington who had the stones to sit down and write out a comprehensive plan to address our looming fiscal crisis. Now you may not like some of his solutions but in the glaring absence of an alternative being presented by progressives...attacking Ryan for what he's proposed seems to me to be the height of hypocrisy.
Have you been living under a rock? The most comprehensive Medicare reforms in decades were passed into law almost two years ago (P.S. Growth in Medicare spending has fallen sharply over the past 20 months or so). Ideas drawn from leading health economists, MedPAC (i.e. those who know Medicare policy best), and others are now on the books and are in the process of being implemented.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top